Accountability 2.0 Overview Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.4

1. Accountability 2.0 Overview Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.4

2. Materials

3. Your role today. . . • Learner • Understanding major changes to the Colorado educational accountability system. • Planner • Communicating with local stakeholders • Local implementation of major changes

4. Phases of Implementation for Colorado’s Revised Academic Standards • Districts/schools continuously monitor performance and adjust improvement strategies. • Districts and schools all use the unified improvement planning template. • Searchable data-based of school/district improvement plans available. • Districts given option to use unified template for improvement plans with professional development • Sample school performance framework (SPF) reports provided to districts • Professional development on Growth Model & using web-based interface • Growth metrics included in district accreditation • Districts accreditation of schools includes SPF indicators. • Priority Improvement and Turnaround districts/schools submit unified improvement plans for state review. • All districts and schools publish improvement plans on www.schoolview.org • Professional development on: accountability system changes, SPF reports, unified improvement planning, data management. • CDE first releases annual reports on school and district growth to all districts. • Web-based Growth Model interface introduced • Growth model metrics used to identify schools for Governor’s Distinguished Improvement Awards

5. K-12 System Mission All students will exit Colorado’s K-12 education system ready for postsecondary education and workforce success. --Colorado’s Achievement Plan for Kids (SB 08-212)

6. Performance Framework Indicators

7. Accountability System Revisions • New bright line: All students ready by exit • Moving from compliance to performance management. • Transparent performance information drives conversations about needed changes. • Student academic growth as a key indicator of performance. • Fairer and clearer cycle of support and intervention for low performance.

8. Critical Questions • How will the system result in improved performance? • For what are different educational stakeholders accountable? • Who is accountable? For what? • How will performance be measured? • How will performance be evaluated? Rated? Accredited? • Under what conditions will the state intervene? • How will schools and districts improve performance (through improvement planning)? How will they know their plans will improve performance? • How will progress towards improved performance be monitored? • What support will the state provide? • What will be publicly reported?

9. Theory of Action: Continuous Improvement Evaluate Evaluate FOCUS Implement Plan

10. Choose a partner. Take out: Colorado Accountability System Components Read individually one row in the chart. When each partner has completed a row, look up and “say something.” Something might be a question, a brief summary, a key point, an interesting idea or a personal connection. Continue until you complete all of the rows in the table. Activity: System Components

11. Timeline • August 2010 – State issues School Performance Framework Reports with initial plan assignment. Federal AYP data released. • October 2010 – District submits accreditation category for schools. • January 2011 – State deadline for priority improvement and turnaround plan submission. • Plans implemented immediately. . . 18 month timeframe • April 2011 – Plans published on schoolview.org

12. School Accreditation Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.4

13. Materials

14. Performance Framework Indicators

15. Activity: School Accreditation • Individually read: Accrediting Schools and Assigning School Plan Types, District Accreditation Handbook, pg. 13-14 • With your team/table group review the School Accreditation Timeline. • Identify: • Big ideas • How this is different from current practice? • What are the advantages of this approach?

16. Big Ideas • Districts are responsible for accrediting schools. • The relationship between districts and the state with regards to school accreditation has changed. • The state provides a framework for evaluating school performance (the school performance frameworks). • Districts can add to the state framework. • State involvement is only with the lowest performing schools – priority improvement and turnaround. • Explicit links between school accreditation and improvement planning.

17. Advantages • Consistent framework for evaluating school performance. • Moving from 3 different evaluation frameworks to a single framework. • Clear guidance from the state about how good is good enough (with regard to school performance). • Consistent focus (on performance). • Greater alignment with federal processes (planning). • Only one plan type assignment will be published.

18. Timeline • August 2010 – State issues School Performance Framework Reports with initial plan assignment. • October 2010 – District submits accreditation category for schools. • January 2011 – State deadline for priority improvement and turnaround plan submission. • April 2011 – Plans published on schoolview.org

19. Planning for School Accreditation • Work with your district team or table group • Use the “District Accreditation of Schools” section of Planning Toolkit. • For each step in the school accreditation process, make notes about: • What will we do? • Who will be involved? • What tools/support do we need?

20. District Accreditation Timeline • Working with your team/ table group, review: • “Timelines for District Accreditation and Plan Submission” • What do you need to do to prepare for changes in district accreditation?

21. Planning for Local Implementation Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.4

22. Materials

23. Agenda Statewide System of Support Local Stakeholder Roles Planning Local Roll-Out

24. CDE Role • Read the Colorado Department of Education role (p. 3 of the District Accountability Handbook) • Major components of the CDE role: • Provide high quality information • Evaluate district and school performance using common indicators • Provide as much support as possible given fiscal constraints

25. Tiered System CDE identifies and prioritizes schools and districts for universal, targeted and intensive supportbased on accountability factors the in relationship to: • existing resources • support structures that are available to ensure that the greatest resource is going to the greatest need.

26. Tiered System of Support Intensive Few Targeted Some Universal All

27. How are schools and districts prioritized for support? Prioritization Factors: • School/District Performance Framework • AYP • Special Education Performance Indicators

28. Types of Supports. . . Universal Supports • Website  (School View Learning Center), Webinars • Program Specific Resources • SpEd • Title I, II, III • Accreditation • Language Acquisition • Licensure • Standards Implementation • Regional Trainings • Targeted Professional Learning Targeted • Focused Technical Assistance • Grants • Reviews (School and District) • Planning Support • Implementation follow-up • Evaluation – Process and Outcomes Intensive • Grants • Focused Technical Assistance • Reviews (School and District) • Planning Support • Implementation follow-up • Evaluation – Process and Outcomes

29. Who is my CDE performance support manager? • Northwest, West Central, Southwest, Pikes Peak (those not listed below) • John Condie, 303-866-6630, condie_j@cde.state.co.us • North Central, Metro, Northeast, Southeast, Pikes Peak (Canon City RE-1, Custer County C-1, Cotopaxi RE-3, Elbert 200, Florence RE-2, Kiowa C-2, Pueblo City 60 and Pueblo County 70) • Jhon Penn, 303-866-6632, penn_j@cde.state.co.us

30. Who else can I reach out to at CDE regarding accountability? • Performance & Policy • Kady Dodds, dodds_k@cde.state.co.us, 303-866-6274 • Somoh Supharukchinda, supharukchinda_s@cde.state.co.us, 303-866-6778 • Research & Evaluation • Bill Bonk, bonk_w@cde.state.co.us, 303-866-6763 • Federal Programs • CDE Homepage > Federal Programs Home > Contacts • www.cde.state.co.us/FedPrograms/general/contacts.asp#TIA

31. Coming Soon. . . . Additional Professional Learning Opportunities • Unified Improvement Planning (several 2 day sessions) – August – November • Colorado Growth Model (on-line facilitated sessions) • Managing data for improvement planning (one day late summer) • Interpreting school and district performance framework reports (on-line tutorials)

32. Agenda Statewide System of Support Local Stakeholder Roles Planning Local Roll-Out

33. Stakeholder Roles • Consider: • Stakeholder Roles section of the District Accountability Handbook (p. 3 – 4) • Stakeholder Roles (Planning Toolkit) • Table discussion: • What questions do we have about any of the roles? • To what degree are each of the local stakeholders in my district prepared to take on these roles? • What additional support will they need to be prepared?

34. Self-Assessment • A needs-assessment tool has been provided for your district team in supporting different stakeholders (Planning Toolkit). • Including: • Stakeholder readiness (to serve each role) • District priority for addressing related stakeholder needs

35. Agenda Statewide System of Support Local Stakeholder Roles Planning Local Roll-Out

36. Planning Stakeholder Communication • Take out the tool for “Planning Stakeholder Support” in the Planning Toolkit. • Work with your team to make notes about different stakeholders and how you might support them in serving their roles. • What additional assistance do you need from CDE to support your stakeholders? (capture on sticky notes).

37. Written: Parking Lot + the aspects of this session that you liked or worked for you. The things you will change in your work or would change about this session. ? Questions that you have Light bulb: ideas, a-has, innovations Additional Needs (sticky notes) Oral: Your current thinking Your Feedback!!!